There's a better way? What's that, voting blue? Violence is done to us by them every day, but when one of us does violence back it's unacceptable? Sometimes violence is not only necessary but morally just.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Violence is not acceptable either way, unless absolutely necessary. It can be morally just but only if it's needed. As I have said, his death will bring no change and as such isn't necessary and thus not just.
It's important that we do not fall off our position at the high ground. It will give them a gift to use against us if we do. They will say, "Look at them advocating for murder. Do you trust them?" Being morally superior is one of the best weapons we have. People will tend to side with such people.
Well enjoy our descent into fascism from your supposed moral high ground. But neither revolution nor resistance happen without violence or blood. Revolution is incompatible with pacifism. Civility politics and the "high ground" are why we are where we are. (I wrote this before you deleted your post)
I'm not against violent revolution against fascism if necessary, in fact it's seemingly becoming more and more necessary each day to me. But this one CEO's death will do nothing to obstruct fascism. Save your ammunition for the political leaders if it comes to that.
Of course it will do something, it's an early step on the ladder to said revolution. It started Americans nationwide talking about class and exploitation and wealth, it's starting to get ALL Americans to see our common enemy. The shift in discourse and what has suddenly become acceptable is remrkble
Comments